Brief Recap: Green Bay Packers Defeat Browns 31-3
by Brandon on Oct 25, 2009 3:41 PM CDT
in News
66 comments
It's hard to find fault when your team wins 31-3. And the Packers did little wrong, the only complaint is some bad penalties.
After a shaky 1st quarter and a strong start by Browns QB Derek Anderson, who began the game completing his first 5 pass attempts, the defense clamped down and QB Aaron Rodgers starting making some big plays. In the end, the Packers offense had 460 yards, and the Browns only had 139.
The Browns' biggest embarrassment was not recording a sack of Rodgers, the first time his protection was perfect all season. There will probably be a lot of talk about rookie LT T.J. Lang, who had a great first career start.
0 recs |
66 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
This was the type of domination the Packers needed to demonstrate last week.
But why look in the past! We won convincingly. Now time to prepare for next weeks game. Need big time focus.
I will mention that I certainly hope the Browns figure something out. They used to be a fun team to watch when they were good. They play in a good division that is usually at the top of the AFC.
Looking to buy: General Manager Deputy Badge
by Bush League All Star on Oct 25, 2009 4:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I know it's only the Browns
but seeing as they gave away five sacks to both the Lions and the Rams, maybe the team has finally figured something out. Hopefully this boosts the line’s confidence for next weeks big game.
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 25, 2009 4:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Great overall performance
The defense has given up 3 points in the last 8 quarters. Yes, they were bad teams but we shut them down as we should. Hawk looked good today.
We ran the ball and Grant ran with a purpose. We were able to make big plays. Not as many offensive penalties. Scored TD’s instead of settling for FG’s. No sacks!
Let’s just hope Finley is ok and ready for next week
Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb
by verno329 on Oct 25, 2009 4:08 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Something you never hear...
Hawk looked good. And rightfully so, he did play good for once.
Looking to buy: General Manager Deputy Badge
by Bush League All Star on Oct 25, 2009 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not to take this off topic
But I really like our chances against MN next week. With Bigby back, the defense has looked much better (Albeit against two very bad teams) and if our line holds up, I see no reason why Rodgers can’t carve up a secondary missing it’s best player. Also, their run defense is still pretty good but I think with Pat Williams on the decline, it has taken a hit. (They’ve allowed 93.5 yards per game)
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 25, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We certainly got some good tape to prepare with
The Steelers were getting to Favre pretty well early on in the game, as well as keeping AP in check.
by Danwood on Oct 25, 2009 4:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like our chances next week
They have been able to run the ball a little here lately and if they can take this into next week that could be huge. Give Rodgers time to attack the secondary and give our pass rush a chance to get to Favre and we’ll have a good shot
Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb
by verno329 on Oct 25, 2009 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably just my nature...
… but I’m not optimistic. I didn’t see the game today, but I’m shocked that somehow the Vikings defense held Pittsburgh’s passing attack in check. I’d like to see how they managed that. Their secondary was weak with Winfield, it shoud be a sieve without him. I agree that with Bigby on the field it’s unlikely that Capers will call 3 man rushes that let Favre stand back there for 7 seconds waiting for someone to come open, but I just think they’re better than the Packers right now. I suspect that the o-line will take a step back next week, though I’m hopeful it won’t be as bad as it was earlier in the year.
Hope I’m wrong. I’d love to see the Packers close to within a 1/2 game of 1st after next week.
What begins in fear usually ends in folly.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Oct 25, 2009 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i'll tell you how they limited pittsburgh's passing
they got to Roethlisberger early and often. Pittsburgh has problems in pass protection, but after they figured it out, Big Ben was torching them.
They ARE vulnerable, we just have to keep Jared Allen and Co. away from Rodgers.
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell_M on Oct 25, 2009 5:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let’s hope that the line can play like they did today.
Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb
by verno329 on Oct 25, 2009 5:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Finishing the day with only 170 passing yards and 1 TD hardly constitutes “torching them”.
by Jayrome007 on Oct 25, 2009 8:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I honestly don't believe they're that much better
but it will come down to whether or not they can protect Rodgers and get to Favre.
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 25, 2009 6:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Vikings ranked #20 against the pass
I agree. The Packers can take the Vikings—they nearly did @MIN, in spite of two drive-killing turn-overs, and way too many sacks.
by DaveInTucson on Oct 26, 2009 1:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It was Hawk's one allotted good game for this season
Wish it coulda been next week instead, tho…
"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root
by Clutch16 on Oct 25, 2009 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stats
Packers
First Downs 23
Total Yards 460
Passing Yards 258
Rushing Yards 202!!!
Penalties (Yds) 8(70)
Turnovers 0
Punts (AVG) 2 (43.5)
Time of Pos. 35:54
Browns
First Downs 11
Total Yards 139
Passing Yards 81
Rushing Yards 58
Penalties (Yds) 5(40)
Turnovers 2 (3 Fumbles, 1 lost, 1 interception)
Punts (AVG) 4(46.3)
Time of Pos. 23:39
Individual
Aaron Rodgers
15/20 att/comp 246 yds 3 TD 0 Int
Ryan Grant
27 car 148 yards 1 TD 37 Long
Donald Driver
2 catches for 84 yards 1 TD
Greg Jennings
5 catches for 58 yards
TD’s: Havner, Driver, J. Jones
AJ Hawk
7 Tackles
Charles Woodson
3 tackles, 1 INT
Looking to buy: General Manager Deputy Badge
by Bush League All Star on Oct 25, 2009 4:32 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
"There will probably be a lot of talk about rookie LT T.J. Lang, who had a great first career start."
Ah, but don’t forget Brandon, no one much talks about offensive linemen when they play well.
by 400metres on Oct 25, 2009 5:17 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Packers smashed on a team they were supposed to beat.
Green Bay opened up a can of Madden on those hapless Browns!
Great! Yes, that’s right, when you consider yourself to be a good team you’re supposed to go out there and jump all over those teams that you’re supposed to beat.
The Browns fall under that category.
Maybe now the Pack can take this game as a momentum builder going into next weeks game against the Queens!!
-GO
by titletown96 on Oct 25, 2009 6:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It was great to see the Packers defeat Cleveland.
They have won the last two games by a combined score of 57-3. Admittedly, it’s the Lions and the Browns, but you always like to see that kind of score.
OT: Did anyone notice that there were a lot of big blowouts today? It wasn’t just Packers over Browns. The other blowouts were:
Chargers over Chiefs (37-7)
Colts over Rams (42-6)
Patriots over Buccaneers (35-7)
Bengals over Bears (45-10)
Jets over Raiders (38-0)
Please let me know if I’m forgetting one. It seemed like there weren’t many competitive games today (Steelers over Vikings being an exception to that).
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy, and taste good with ketchup!
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Oct 25, 2009 7:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I was thinking the same thing
The only other real competitive game was the Saints game I thought.
dickie_thon: Third baseman Bill Hall / Watches the third strike go by / Gamel grabs his glove
by GoGregGo on Oct 25, 2009 7:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That game
And Vikings-Steelers were the only games which were really competitive. I hope there aren’t nearly as many blowouts next week.
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy, and taste good with ketchup!
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Oct 25, 2009 7:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
in fact, only one would be good.
Kind of a shame the Rockies aren't around to win it for Balloon Boy
-billyok
by blackoutsox on Oct 25, 2009 7:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Chya Booooy!
Let the Favre circus extravaganza begin. I’m already pumped for it.
Green and Gold / Black and White
by OznCoop on Oct 25, 2009 8:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Its got that, yeah
But this will be a big punch to whoever loses in the fight for the division.
by PackaCracka on Oct 25, 2009 9:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
Packers over Vikings, score doesn’t matter.
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy, and taste good with ketchup!
by Vermont Cubs Fan on Oct 25, 2009 9:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and that one was a HUGE blowout at the half.
by TrevorR on Oct 26, 2009 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you can expect that almost every week
The Chiefs, Rams, Bucs, and Raiders are that bad.
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 25, 2009 7:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Parody is a rarity
There are so many aweful teams right now that its ruining what the NFL has tried so hard to establish (and up until now has). An uber-competitive league with hope sprinkled evenly at the beginning of the season. And I think the downfall of this system is the impatience of owners when it comes to coaching staff. Anything less than 3 years is to short to determine whether a coach gets it or not. This “out with the old, in with the new” attitude displayed by trigger happy owners (and feuled by impatient fans) is deluding the coaching talent.
by Jayrome007 on Oct 25, 2009 8:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, it's rare to see that kind of comedy in the NFL
On the other hand, parity is also a rarity ;-)
by Danwood on Oct 25, 2009 9:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The game went as expected
It does not always happen that way, but a win is a win. It is good to see the Packers play as expected. They need to build on this to focus on an angry Vikings team that looks to rebound from a game they feel they should have won against the Steelers.
I sincerely hope the fans show some class and cheer Favre when he returns. At least do not boo him. Win or lose the game next week, it has no affect on the past and what Favre has done for Green Bay and the fans. As Favre said, his heart will always be here. If the fans boo him, I will be embarrassed for all of Wisconsin football fans. Favre gave hope to the Packers when our team had not won a SB in 30 years. 30 years! He became the front page sports icon he is today because of what he had done in Green Bay. After giving everything he had to give, the staff chose to go in another direction. That is the NFL. Favre is playing for the only team that decided to go after him in the offseason. And it isn’t as if he jumped at the chance and started spouting hate-filled speeches against GB and the fans. It wasn’t that long ago that Aaron Rogers told the fans to “…shut up.” Even Favre never got that frustrated. How quickly GB fans forget when they feel they HAVE to hate Brett Favre.
Anyway, that’s enough of that. Good game for the Packers. I hope they play well next week too! A lot of people are praising Lang. I will withhold judgment until he faces a real team. I’m not sure about Clifton’s status next week. If Lang has to play, then we’ll see then. I am not confident about the Packers chances against Minnesota on the best of days, even at Lambeau. One thing I know for sure. Next week should be a game we will all likely remember for some time. It might be Favre’s last visit to Green Bay as a player. That alone is meaningful. I honestly don’t care as much if we win or lose. And watching Favre with those stupid horns on his helmet is annoying as heck. Yet to have Brett Favre throwing the football in Lambeau Field one more time. That is something special. It takes the sting out of losing just a little bit. Of course I say that now… I might feel differently later.
by starmark on Oct 25, 2009 10:39 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I think I would boo
I’m sure it will be a mixed reaction. I’d boo next Sunday and then a standing ovation when his jersey is retired in a couple of years. That’s just me though.
by grant76 on Oct 25, 2009 10:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, doesn't work for me
I’m a Packer fan first and a Farve fan….well, he’s down on the list at the point.
I’ll cheer and clap for him when he finally decides to retire. As of now, the rival team that he now plays for does not need any additional support from me. Personally, I’d prefer that people just sit on their hands when he’s announced, but I know there are people out there who are Favre fans first.
And can we have some context to the Aaron Rodgers quote telling the fans to “shut up”? As I recall, he’s been nothing but class through this whole ordeal. Classier than Favre, for that matter. And “the staff” didn’t choose to go another direction…FAVRE RETIRED! He retired, they went with Rodgers, the rest is history.
What was with Kendall's shaved head?....looks like a fist with eyes.
scsteve (Pirates fan)
Correction: Jason Kendall IS a fist with eyes.
Derek (Brewers fan)
by bluejazz04 on Oct 25, 2009 10:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
the "shut up" comment
Maybe starmark took Rodgers comment the wrong way. I remember reporters asking him about the Favre saga and about the fans and he said that the packers fans could shut up and join his bandwagon. I don’t know about you but that’s the kind of swagger I want from a young quarterback (reminds me of Ryan Braun a bit). I loved that comment and personally it had nothing to do with class.
Friends don't let friends be cub fans
by BIGPAMPERINO on Oct 25, 2009 11:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, but....
We all know there can only be one “King of Swagger” in Wisconsin ;)
What was with Kendall's shaved head?....looks like a fist with eyes.
scsteve (Pirates fan)
Correction: Jason Kendall IS a fist with eyes.
Derek (Brewers fan)
by bluejazz04 on Oct 26, 2009 12:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Favre didn't bring a Superbowl here himself
Wolf, Holmgren, and White were all equally important parts of that equation. Green Bay made Favre relevant, not the other way around and he kicked dirt in all our faces after we all made him a very rich man. That being said, I would rather they don’t boo or cheer, just show indifference to the fact he’s there, but that won’t happen.
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 26, 2009 6:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
HUH?
Some class? He plays for the Vikings now…screw that. He plays for our nemesis who is 1.5 games above us in the division right now and already beat us once this season. I would have NO intention of allowing there to be CHEERING heard for him during this game when he comes out. I want him to hear the boos and wonder what happened and think about how much it SUCKS to hear boos at his “home”. You realize if the fans do NOTHING, all you will hear is the Minnesota fans cheering, why would a PACKER fan want that? Now that said, quit hijacking the game thread, there will be plenty of time for Favre talk all week!
PLUS this won’t be a factor, there likely won’t even be chance to boo or cheer for just Favre. Maybe the Vikings team and in that case I hope EVERY Packer fan boos as loudly as possible.
by TrevorR on Oct 26, 2009 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
Cut the crap starmark
I love how bias your opinions are when it comes to the Favre/Rodgers situation. Rodgers didn’t just come out and tell Packer fans to shut up and you know that. He had to deal with Favre obsessed fans like yourself who kept on coming up to him and cussing him out, and even sending their kids to do the dirty work for them. He got sick of the constant criticism when he had nothing to do with Favre retiring and then the Packers not accepting him back so he told those who were giving him crap to get behind him. When did he just come out and tell the fans to shut up?
I’ve come across a lot of folks like you who hate on Rodgers just because you love Favre. What’s the need for that? Why hate Rodgers and make crap up just because you like Favre? It makes no sense. You can’t like them both? You are right that Favre never told Packer fans to shut up, neither did Rodgers, but Favre has been the one who has said in two or three seperate interviews this season that Packer fans need to get over it. He’s telling us as fans how to feel about him going to are most hated rival. Now does that make sense?
And you say that Favre didn’t jump at the chance to play with the Vikings, they were the only team that wanted him. Are you that naive or just ignorant? Favre made it known to even the Packers management that he wanted to be traded to the Vikings if they wouldn’t accept him back. The guy asked to be traded to the Packers most hated rival. Then he gets a release from the Jets with the impression that he is once again retiring while fully knowing that he’s gonna sign with the Vikings before the season starts. You are delusional. The guy wanted to be a Viking from day one.
Finally, just the fact that you admit to not even caring who wins the game on Sunday tells everyone where you stand. Why even come onto a Packer site if you wouldn’t mind seeing the Vikings come into Lambeau and beat the Packers. That is completely ridiculous. What Favre did in Green Bay was great and he along with White, Wolf, and a ton of other guys brought the Packers back to life, but guess what? He plays for the Vikings now. Were you rooting for the Seahawks to beat the Packers because Holmgren was coaching them? Sounds stupid doesn’t it. Same thing with your Favre status.
by GGGamer on Oct 26, 2009 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey GGGarner
Please shut up already. Your Favre hatred colors everything you whine about.
I am looking forward to a great game, but I am quite concerned that the Packers’ blowouts of two of the weak sisters of the NFL (the Lions and Browns right now are 2 – 11 combined, with 175 points scored and 367 points given up, better than a 2-to-1ratio against) really doesn’t tell us a whole lot. We are beat up (3 healthy receivers, one healthy legitimate tight end), and we will probably have to play a rookie left tackle and a horrible right tackle. On the other hand, the Vikings are a bit beaten up too. I wonder if McCarthy is going to game plan for Peterson (again) and run the risk of Favre carving up the secondary (again). What would the rest of you readers do?
by ktenreb on Oct 26, 2009 4:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
GGGamer is spot on. No need to tell him to shut up.
I would game plan the same way we did for them last game. One of the main reasons Favre had as much success as he did was because Bigby was out. Not to discredit what Favre did but it’s pretty easy to carve up a defense whom has a big gaping hole in the middle of it.
We are a different defense with Bigby, Matthews finally starting, and Capers finally getting Kampman more involved rushing the passer. Our defense ranks 3rd in total yards and 5th in scoring defense right now, and I think this game will look much different then the one of week 4.
Are wr’s are beaten up, but luckily for us Winfield is out. After him, the whole secondary is awfully suspect. We threw for 385 yards against them last game and honestly I would expect Rodgers to do the same thing next week.
by packallday555 on Oct 26, 2009 5:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Beating the Lions and Browns doesn't show us anything
other than that they are able to beat the teams they are supposed to beat and by a wide margin. Does it mean everything is back on track and they’ll beat the Vikings next week? We’ll find out Sunday, but it doesn’t hurt to be optimistic about winning a game especially when you do it in a convincing fashion no matter the opponent. You’re right the Packers are beat up at receiver but I think Jennings and Driver will be more than enough for a very suspect Vikings secondary that is missing it’s best player. As for the line, I think that will once again become an issue as our only tow choices for LT is a gimpy Clifton or a rookie.
by Charlie Kelly on Oct 26, 2009 9:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good game from us
So I have been quick to criticize Grant but he returned to 07’ form today. I actually saw him make the first guy miss the majority of the time, and he finally showed some of that quickness and vision we saw in 07. Oh and Jackson looked pretty good today as well.
Rodgers looked very good as he normally does and how about Driver? So much for him beginning his decline. I hope Finley is ok, he has really begun to breakout for us.
And the defense continues to impress. Of course it is the Browns but they did put up some points on Pitt last week. Jenkins and Kampman looked great today. Jenkins gave Thomas all he could handle today, and it didn’t matter whether Kampman was standing or in a 3 point stance, he was getting pressure consistently.
How about Hawk and Barnett? I actually saw both of them shed blocks and then make tackles! Now granted it is the Browns, but neither was able to do this against the Rams or Lions so this is a good sign.
Matthews continues to impress me, though I have to admit I was a little ticked off when he got sucked inside on that counter. And I was wondering where Raji was and then he showed up when Cleveland was down on our goaline in the 4th quarter. He got great penetration on either 1st or 2nd down, which allowed Hawk to come up and make the tackle, and then on 3rd down he pancaked the LG, and fell forward which resulted in a loss of 2 yards for Cleveland.
And probably the most important thing……WE GAVE UP 0 SACKS! Haha I know it’s pathetic that we’re happy about that but we haven’t been able to accomplish that yet this year, and I don’t really care about the talent (or lack of) of the team we were playing. Lang looked great in his first start, and built off of his previous performances. I’m still not completely sold on him because 1.25 games really isn’t enough of a sample size, but we may just have found our future LT..
We blew the Browns out, like we should have and were expected to do. The o-line looked great, and while the Browns aren’t good at all, their D-line and OLBs are pretty good (Rogers, Williams, Wimbley.) This definitely makes me feel a bit more comfortable about our huge game next week, and I’m really excited to see if Bigby will make a difference like many of us feel he will.
by packallday555 on Oct 25, 2009 10:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Couple things
I think Cleveland’s offense sucked about as bad last week against Pittsburgh as they did against the Packers. They had 14 points against the Steelers, but one score was on special teams (the Steelers gave up another special teams TD to the Vikings this week). Either way, we’re comparing the Packers defense to the Steelers, and that wasn’t something I’d dream of doing last season.
When Matthews got sucked in on the counter: I’ve seen him and Poppinga do it this season. I think they’re coached to do it. Capers likes to force running backs outside and then the cornerbacks can make the tackle. On that particular play, there was no one outside of Matthews (obviously), and it was a big play, but it seems to be working overall this season.
by Brandon on Oct 25, 2009 11:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the reply
Ah I forgot that one of those TDs was via Cribbs but yes the fact that we can even compare them to the Steelers has me on cloud nine haha.
That would make sense, because it did seem like Matthews wanted to go inside rather then being forced inside. Someone did have a chance (I think it was Barnett) but they wiffed.
by packallday555 on Oct 25, 2009 11:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's going to be alot of fun
to see our defensive rankings tomorrow. We could be top five in both scoring and total defense.
Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey
by jobe on Oct 25, 2009 11:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just thought I would let you know what are rankings are, though I’m sure you’ve probably looked already! We’re now 3rd in total yards and 5th in scoring! I know that’s against 3 of the bottom teams in the league but the improvement in our defense since Bigby’s return is fairly obvious, and I’m really excited to see how we do against a potent Vikes offense.
by packallday555 on Oct 26, 2009 10:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thats better than the year we were supposed to be great, 2007.
But, once again, thats alot of Cleveland and Detroit factored in.
Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey
by jobe on Oct 26, 2009 11:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
We did do great against the Vikes run game though in week 4, we just couldn’t stop the pass. I think and am hoping that having Bigby back will change things a bit. Guess we’ll see next Sunday!
by packallday555 on Oct 27, 2009 12:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Biogby is a definite upgrade
But he’s not the complete answer. He wouldn’t have been on the field in the Rhino; the Packers decided in the first Vikings game that Peterson would not beat them, but instead they gambled that Favre was old and didn’t have it. Turns out he did, that night.
This week, Bigby isn’t going to hold up against the Vikings O-line as well as Popinga/Chillar did. So, if you the Packers play with another safety (whose strength, by the way, is run support and not necessarily pass coverage), they could make themselves vulnerable to an AP game.
by ktenreb on Oct 27, 2009 6:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see your points
But we really didn’t line up in our 5 LB defense all that much against the Vikes. The reason we stopped the run was because our front 3 got consistent pressure and filled all the gaps taking away the cutback lanes.
And we didn’t load up the box either. We had our front 7 in there but for the most part Collins and Martin were back.
So, if you the Packers play with another safety (whose strength, by the way, is run support and not necessarily pass coverage), they could make themselves vulnerable to an AP game.
While I probably would have agreed with this statement before the season began, I cannot do so now. Bigby is much improved in coverage, and he is a big asset to our team. He had a hand in shutting down Olsen week 1 and had a great INT week 6.
I think you may be surprised about how much better we look against the pass come this Sunday. But who knows!
by packallday555 on Oct 27, 2009 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
I have heard a couple folks say that the Packers loaded up the box against AP but they didn’t. The played in nickel half of the game and had there normal 7 guys in the box on base for most of the other half of the game. Just like you said, the Packers d-line and Kampman and Matthews closed the door on AP the first game and Derrick Martin killed them in coverage. Having Bigby will help immensely.
by GGGamer on Oct 27, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Two Things
Matthews was suppose to go inside and Barnett and Hawk were suppose to fill better. Barnett got sucked in or pushed out (I can’t remember which) but either way he didn’t fill as well as he should have and then Hawk didn’t get over at all like he was suppose to. So it looked like Matthews got sucked in but really he did his job and Barnett and Hawk did not.
In regards to Lang, I love the kids potential but at LG not LT. He’s not the most fleet footed and he has short arms. He’s a better run blocker than pass blocker so I would love to see him at LG. I said this before and someone ripped me but the kid really does remind me of a young Steve Hutchinson the LG of the Vikings. They’re about the same size (6’4, 6’5 and about 315lbs.) and they both can tear it up run blocking. I think he’s the Packers future Pro Bowler at LG, I really do. He could be a better LT than Clifton this season but I think his future’s at LG.
by GGGamer on Oct 26, 2009 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
I had a feeling Matthews responsibilty was inside. It did seem he tried to go inside, which at the time seemed odd to me. And your right about Barnett, he got out there but whiffed on the tackle.
Yes, I would agree with that as well. I think he would be a better LT then Clifton for the rest of the year. I’m curious to see what happens with Lang when Clifton is healthy. It’s clear that he should be playing and I hope MM will stick him at LG.
by packallday555 on Oct 26, 2009 5:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If McCarthy’s gonna start Clifton at LT no matter what if he’s healthy, I would definitely like to see Lang in place of Colledge no question. Good point. I see Lang and Tauscher as the two avenues needed in order to solidify the o-line for the rest of the season.
by GGGamer on Oct 26, 2009 5:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same here
A healthy Clifton at LT, Lang at LG, Spitz at C, Sitton at RG, and Tauscher at RG could really solidify our o-line. I really hope that’s what the line will look like sometime soon.
by packallday555 on Oct 26, 2009 5:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just wonder
if they would move Lang inside that quickly. I like the lineup you mention but also wonder it would be ready
Frye is honestly gotta be one of the top 10 3rd Stringers in all of the NFL right now--colbyb
by verno329 on Oct 26, 2009 7:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Same here honestly
It sounds like Tauscher is ahead of schedule, and I read in an article that he could possibly play this weekend, though I doubt he will. I would like us to give Clifton as much time as he needs to get back to 100%, as well as Spitz. So far both their replacements have done a great job and having them both 100% will be much more effective.
by packallday555 on Oct 26, 2009 10:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perspective?
I know that we all want to see progress, but Cleveland might be the worst team in the NFL right now. Detroit certainly seems better than Cleveland. We were fooled by a bright looking preseason. Let’s not repeat that mistake until we see the Packers pass a real test.
Now, there was a bunch of good news today. What the Bengals did to the Bears today is illegal in 27 states. That brightens my perspective some, not because the Bears lost— because that shows that we were all underestimating the Bengals when we lost to them in week 2. Minnesota’s loss to Pitt offers hope that the divisional race will actually be one, IF the Packers can come up big next week.
If Green Bay wins next week, I will be impressed. Right now, all the Packers did was avoid severe embarrassment by beating a team that has no pulse.
by NYCPac on Oct 26, 2009 12:32 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
+1
All we learned from this game is that we can beat up a professional college flag football team.
Grant gets 100 yards? Whoopee
Rodgers doesn’t get sacked? Congrats
Defense looks stout? Unbelievable
There is a very big difference between winning games you’re supposed to win, and actually doing the same thing to good teams. I’m glad we got the win, but if next week we revert into Sack-A-Rodgers, Allow-Big-Pass-A-Thon mode then this game will completely and wholly mean zip.
by Danwood on Oct 26, 2009 6:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I got a kick out of the Vikings fans bragging about beating the Lions, the Browns, a bad on the road Frank Gore-less 49ers team that should have really won that game, and the Rams, but now I’m seeing some of the same joy come from Packer fans after these last two weeks.
When you play a lousy team like the Browns or Lions the score shouldn’t be looked at that much, what should be looked at his how well the players played individually and if the team improved on things they needed to improve upon. I’m wasn’t happy about the Lions win, but I’m a little bit more comfortable with the Browns win because even though they suck, the Packers improved on somethings they needed to. They are gaining some momentum now and it looks like the defense is really coming together with Bigby back and Matthews becoming a monster. I think the Packers team this week will be much improved from the team that originally played in Minnesota a few weeks ago.
by GGGamer on Oct 26, 2009 3:46 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
wow !
Great weekend for the Packers.
Big win for the Green and Gold, the Viqueens lose, and the Bears got stomped !
The Packers actually looked like a good football team yesterday ! But I almost forgot, they played the Browns… well the Browns aren’t very good.
Still there are a lot of misques the Packers will have to correct if they are going to beat the Viqueens sunday.
Hats of for Spencer Havner, what a great game he had !
by Jarlsberg on Oct 26, 2009 2:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
anyone else worried about
Finley? He’s been doing great the past couple of weeks and it would be suck to lose him (and Swain) and only have five??? WRs/TEs out there.
by ATBxBezerker on Oct 26, 2009 5:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Definitely
Losing Finley will be huge. I think the wideouts will be fine if they call up Jake Allen because he looked better than Swain in the pre-season and practice IMO anyway so that would still give them three good wideouts and a solid Allen, but the Finley injury could be huge. He absolutely killed the Vikings last game. If Havner steps up and plays well again it won’t matter as much, but that is a big if.
by GGGamer on Oct 26, 2009 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We need Finley, but can work without him
If we lose Finley, you can expect a lot of action from Lee and Havner lined up against Jared Allen. It’ll be unfortunate losing them as a target, but we’ll have to do it. I think if this is done though, Rodgers will have time and Jennings will have his breakout game this season. With Finley in there, we have an excellent dual TE attack. No matter how we setup our attack though, we need a TE blocking Jared Allen at all times. It’ll be unfortunate going into next weeks game with only 3 reliable targets in Driver, Jennings, and Jones. However, at least our best WR’s are in the game yet, so that is the positive side of it. Against Minnesota, we need to pray nobody else gets injured and we need to abandon any use of the FB. We have to spread the defense. I think more action for Brandon Jackson will only work to our benefit. He is faster than Grant and would run better without a FB compared to Grant. Jackson also adds that versatility in the passing game, so we need to play Jackson on more downs. I am confident in defeating Minnesota as long as either Lee or Havner is double teaming Jared Allen all game or at least bumping him along with Jackson.
Our D simply put just needs to blitz this time and put pressure on Favre. They need to take some risks or Favre will light them up inevitably.
by Jabooty on Oct 26, 2009 3:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Acme Packing Company
Related FanShots on Acme Packing Company
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
